Regulation D Resources to offer STO Prep Services
Regulation D Resources, or ‘RDR’, has just announced their intent to begin offering a variety of services tailored towards digital security offerings. More specifically, they have stated that they intend to provide a variety of services that will aid in, not only the preparation of an STO, but the execution as well. Below are a few of those services, as described in their press release.
- Private Placement Memorandum preparation
- SEC and State Filing preparation and filing support
- Providing assistance in the development of the Token capitalization structure
- Setting the investment terms associated the Tokens
- Providing assistance in understanding the parameters needed for the Smart Contract
- Providing access to, and assistance working with, RDR’s third party managed partner platform for the execution of the token launch onto the blockchain
To branch into digital securities is not a stretch for RDR. With an extensive history of dealing with traditional Regulation D exemptions, RDR simply needs to adapt their experience to a new medium. In other words, they are able to ‘hit the ground running’.
In their press release, Regulation D Resources’, Douglas Ruark, commented on the development.
“Utilizing the Regulation D exemption is the most straightforward path to execute a Securities Token Offering and remain in compliance with Federal and State securities rules.” Ruark continued, “Based on our current fee structure, a Regulation D Resources client can have the STO offering prepared, PPM documents developed, and the tokens launched onto the blockchain for approximately $10,000 which is a significant reduction in the fees typically associated with an STO.”
With the rapidly growing interest in the digital securities sector, Regulation D Resources find themselves among a competitive group of companies. These companies are both geographically and functionally diverse. While not all of the following companies represent comprehensive, end-to-end platforms, each is a direct competitor Regulation D Resources.
These are but only a few that could populate this list. The point being – Regulation D Resources have their work cut out for them.
Regulation D Resources
RDR is not a young fledgling in this burgeoning industry. The company has been in operation for 20 years now, with steady growth and expansion of services being seen since.
RDR maintains headquarters in Lakewood, Colorado. From here, RDR has established themselves as a trustworthy, and constant, presence in the eyes of both the public and the SEC.
In Other News
As previously stated, RDR has competition. To learn more about a few of these platforms looking to compete, check out the articles below.
Bank of Russia Looks to Retcon Regulations Surrounding Digital Assets
A pilot program, sanctioned by the Bank of Russia, was developed, and recently completed, by Russian mining industry giant, Nornickel.
This pilot, which took place within the bank’s regulatory sandbox was structured as a means to test the veracity of the benefits surrounding digital assets, and the potential role they can play in finance.
The pilot saw a platform developed by Nornickel, which provides its clients with various capabilities surrounding digital assets. Through the use of ‘hybrid tokens’ the platform provides, but isn’t limited to, tokenization of…
The goal hoped to be achieved through offering these services is two-fold, like most tokenization platforms.
- Provide companies easier access to financing opportunities
- Provide investors with an increase palette of investment choices.
The Bank of Russia did not embark on this endeavour for the fun of it. They have noted the potential role that digital assets will play in the future of finance, and are looking to prepare themselves accordingly.
As such, they have now submitted framework surrounding digital assets, in hopes of seeing new amendments made to Russia’s current laws governing crypto – Framework established during Nornickle’s time in the bank’s regulatory sandbox.
We have previously taken a look at a few of the laws governing blockchain in Russia, which the nation’s central bank hopes to see amended. Make sure to peruse the following article to see the areas which stand to, potentially, be altered.
As stated, the Bank of Russia, only today, released a statement on the successful completion of the pilot program. The following is a translation of commentary provide by the bank.
Ivan Zimin, Director of the Financial Technology Department of the Bank of Russia, states,
“It was one of the largest sandbox projects. We have studied in detail the new business model and its compliance with the needs of the market. An important part of the service is the use of hybrid tokens, which make it easy to adapt to the needs of business and consumers and provide flexible solutions to attract investment. As a result of the piloting, the Bank of Russia proposed to include in the draft federal law “On Digital Financial Assets” the provisions necessary for the introduction and development of such solutions in the emerging market of digital assets, which were supported by the government agencies and business.”
Seeking a Friendly Hand
Establishing a clear framework surrounding digital assets is clearly of importance when gauging industry development. As industry participants look to continue expanding their products and services, we have seen many begin seeking out nations which have had the foresight to implement such framework.
One company, recently covered, that is doing just that, is Smartlands – a UK based tokenization platform. Smartlands recently announced that they would be basing their future moves on the Liechtenstein Blockchain act.
While news of a potential implementation of government backed framework is, no doubt, welcome, Russia has remained skeptical of the cryptocurrency industry at large. Tokenization of assets and financial instruments in a regulated manner are one thing, but cryptocurrency transactions are another beast entirely.
Russia has taken a trepidatious stance towards cryptocurrencies, as they link them to potential money laundering schemes. This stance has been reiterated as recently as February 17, 2020 by the Bank of Russia, as they look to update ‘Directive 375-P’ – essentially a manual for identifying illicit financial activity.
SEC Charges Opporty for 2018 ICO
This week, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) continued its ICO crackdown. This time, the firm levied charges against project Opporty Founder and Brooklyn-resident Sergii Grybniak. The firm alleges that Grybniak broke the law when his firm raised approximately $600,000 during its 2018 ICO.
News of the charges first broke via Jan. 21 press release. In the release, the SEC reveals the charges laid against Grybniak in detail. Importantly, the primary charge is participating in the unregistered sale of securities. Additionally, the SEC claims that Grybniak made false statements in order to encourage more investor participation.
These statements include a myriad of exaggerated and completely fake claims. In one instance, Opporty claimed that its 2018 ICO was “100% SEC-compliant.” Unfortunately, this claim proved to be the tip of the iceberg. Apparently, Opporty also claimed to have thousands of “verified providers” who were ready to work with the platform.
This claim became so overblown that in one piece of marketing material, Opporty suggested it had a business database that included around 17 million participants. In actuality, the firm had no partnerships. Unfortunately, these claims served one main purpose, to push more investment capital into the ICO.
Major Software Firm
As if the shower of lies put forth weren’t enough, Opporty also made some very specific partnership claims that proved to be bunk as well. According to the SEC, the firm lied about a partnership with a major software company. This lie was to help ease investor doubt about the ability of developers to deliver on their hefty platform promises.
SEC Steps In – Opporty
It doesn’t take much research to see why Opporty ended up in the SEC’s crosshairs. Now, the SEC seeks injunctions against all future digital offerings by the company. On top of the cease-and-desist, regulators require Opporty to return all the funds the company raised during its 2018 ICO. Also, the firm is to face a variety of civil penalties for its actions.
Opporty executives sold the concept to investors as a blockchain-based ecosystem for small businesses. The platform was to provide these small-to-medium sized companies with access to advanced blockchain systems. For example, businesses could list their services and lock in their clients via smart contracts.
United States Investors
Aside from the obvious scamming that took place, Opporty made another key error in its strategy. You see, unlike many similar ICOs, the offering did not explicitly exclude U.S. investors from participating. The 2018 ICO included investments from around 200 US citizens. In this way, the firm invited the SEC to monitor its actions throughout its entire crowdfunding campaign.
An Oppurty Lost
Given the long list of violations this firm now faces, it’s easy to imagine a scenario in which Opporty decides to close its doors. Already, numerous SEC-charged firms have taken similar measures prior to refunding clients’ funds. For now, Opporty has a long legal battle and hefty fines to deal with. You can expect to hear more from this case as the SEC pursues its charges against Grybniak.
Disguises, Fake Identities, and an Illegal ICO – The SEC Looks to Lay Charges
The SEC is hard at work ousting, and holding accountable, those in the world of blockchain that have breached securities laws. Most recently, the SEC has turned their attention to an ICO hosted by a pair of companies operated by a duo of devious individuals.
- CG Blockchain Inc.
- BCT Inc.
This pairing of companies was marketed as developing technology to disrupt hedge funds, and the way they operate.
The Ring Leaders
- Boaz Manor (alias ‘Shaun Macdonald)
- Edith Pardo (alias ‘Edith Mehler’)
In all endeavours, it is believed that Boaz Manor was at the helm, with Edith Pardo acting as a ‘front-woman’, deflecting attention from Manor’s past.
In this particular case, the pair of companies, and the aforementioned individuals, are accused of facilitating/hosting a ‘fraudulent and unregistered offering of digital asset securities’.
$30 million worth of these securities were sold to investors, under the guise of a utility token ‘BCT’. Beyond simply selling illegal securities, those responsible flat out lied to their investors on a variety of fronts.
- Fake Identities
- Fake chain of command
- Product state of development
- Product Adoption
- Investments by founders
The list goes on. Simply put, they were not who they said they were, and the companies did not have a developed product gaining traction within the industry.
This next bit is not an everyday occurrence – rather, it was something you would see in a movie. Knowing full well that their activities were in violation of various securities based laws, Manor and Edith Pardo felt it prudent to hide their identities.
In order to do this, and distance themselves from their past activities (more on that, later), the pair went to great lengths. The SEC states,
“During the scheme, Manor employed a number of deceptive devices related to his fake identity and to the concealment of his background and role.”
Some of the tactics used to conceal their identities included dying hair, growing beards, attaining fake identification under the alias ‘Shaun MacDonald’, etc.
There are few reasons to justify hiding one’s identity in the manner that Manor did – either you’ve done something bad, or are doing something bad. In this particular case, Manor is guilty of both.
We’ve discussed the illegalities associated with his actions in the aforementioned ICO, however Manor has a history of such activity. Dating back to 2005 in Canada, Manor was found to be running a fraudulent hedge fund, valued at nearly $750 million.
When light was shed upon his operation, Manor proceeded to flee the great white north, becoming a fugitive in the process. After eventually returning, and completing a prison sentence of 1 year, Manor went on his way, staying out of the limelight until now.
Due to the great lengths gone to by the pair to partake in the aforementioned illegal activities, in addition to the sum of money raised, the SEC is taking a strong stance. The following is an excerpt from their court filing.
“Unless Defendants are restrained and enjoined, they will again engage in the acts, practices, transactions, and courses of business set forth in this Complaint or in acts, practices, transactions, and courses of business of similar type and object.”
The Securities and Exchange Commission is a United Stated based regulatory body, tasked with creating, an enforcing, regulation surrounding securities. The goal of which is to foster and maintain a fair, transparent, and efficient market for all participants.
Chairman, Jay Clayton, currently oversees company operations.
- Bank of Russia Looks to Retcon Regulations Surrounding Digital Assets
- Custodial Specialists ‘Copper’ Draws $8M in Investments through Series A
- Smartlands Begins Realignment with Eyes on Liechtenstein Blockchain Act
- Circle Attempts to Sell SeedInvest, Doubling Down on StableCoin
- Flyt Property Brings First Tokenized Real Estate STO to Africa